Learning and Development Program for Eastman Sports Cars - Case Study Example

1. Introduction Eastman Sports Cars, an entrepreneurial venture, demonstrates lack of leadership in its operations. itative management style has resulted in low morale of the employees which in turn is responsible for high absenteeism and poor timekeeping. The new management is attempting to resolve issues through HR planning focusing on recruitment procedures and performance evaluation. However, the new management also realizes that some technical training is insufficient. Incorporating training and development in the organization in Eastman Sports Cars is a challenge as communication within the organization is poor. Under the circumstances, an effective learning and development program has to be drawn up. 2. Learning & Development (L&D) L&D has to be involved from the start of the when a new business process is re-engineered. The employee development opportunities should match the business needs of the organization (Anonymous, 2008). An organization needs leaders who can identify the learning and knowledge gaps and address these issues. They have to be involved from the beginning of the re-engineering process and take strategic initiatives. Organizational learning encompasses a wide range of activities and processes. A learning organization can be identified as one that encourages the employees to engage in the learning process through dialogue, experimentation and from one another (Gieskes, Hyland & Magnusson, 2002). However, learning may not always be beneficial to the organization because learning may not always be positive (Field, 1997). Employees may learn a great deal about avoiding responsibility and minimizing effort. This does not enrich either their own or the organization’s knowledge base. Individuals can learn but they keep what they learn to themselves. This requires collaborative learning that extends beyond the individual employee. Literature on organizational learning is closely linked to empowerment. On a typical working day, employees encounter situations where they can improve the status quo or do nothing (Field, 1997). If they feel empowered, they are likely to act and learn in the process. However, empowered employees can even harm the organization and may not want to apply themselves to management’s goals. They can undermine management wishes, deliberately avoid work and pressure. In the process, management risks losing control of one’s own status and power. This enhances the importance of management development. 3. Management development Management development is crucial to gaining and sustaining competitive advantage. Organizations do arrange for managers to take time out and undergo training. The managers come back filled with enthusiasm but it is short-lived. The new knowledge needs to be given after-care so that it remains active and effective. However, there are several barriers to transfer of knowledge – lack of empowerment, lack of peer or organizational support, peer group resistance and pressure of current assignments (Belling, James & Ladkin, 2004). This can be facilitated by providing the employees the opportunity to apply the learning, by motivating and rewarding the employees and supporting the employee. 4. Organizational learning Learning must have a long-term perspective. When changes become necessary it is not advisable to respond in an ad hoc manner (Orlikowaski & Hofman, 1997). Short-term improvements can end up in significant long-term costs (Smith, 2001). Real learning has to come from within. Human beings should be able to re-create themselves. This is applicable to both individuals and organizations and hence it is not enough for a firm to merely ‘survive’ (Senge cited by Smith). Eastman at the moment is just ‘surviving’. Having a short-term perspective, Eastman ignores feedbacks as they consider it inconsequential. For Eastman ‘survival learning’ or ‘adaptive learning’ is important. ‘Adaptive learning’ (single-loop) has to take place in conjunction with ‘generative learning’ (double-loop learning), which enhances the capacity to create. In single-loop learning feedback enables the detection and correction of errors by changing routine behaviours so that the error is not repeated (Garćia-Morales, Verdú-Jover & Lloréns, 2009). This however, does not bring about significant changes in structure or organization culture. Only the immediate tasks can be controlled but in double-loop learning takes place at the level of rules, insights and principles. The organizational errors can be detected and corrected and then connected to the organizational values. The employees would be encouraged to learn and perform beyond routines more efficiently. This makes learning a proactive process leading to innovation. Critical questioning and learning how to learn are important. Besides, key organizational functions such as employee relations, skills formation, information systems also support learning (Field & Ford). Employees at Eastman would have to be motivated to develop insights and be innovative. The training style of a program is very important as it could be ‘hard’ or ‘soft’ training style (Belling, James & Ladkin, 2004). The ‘hard’ training style is concerned with what to think and with giving trainees definite answers. A ‘hard’ training style can be either tangible or intangible. The tangible style focuses on acquisition of specific competencies or analytical tools. The intangible ‘hard’ style focuses on using competing ideas and facts to shape guidelines. The ‘soft’ training style assists the employees with asking questions about and gaining insight into the issues. Thus the ‘soft’ tangible style focuses on raising awareness of issues and the ‘soft’ intangible style is concerned with sharing experiences to assist reflection. 5. Barriers to learning Organizational learning should be a natural process but it is neither automatic and nor is it effortless (Gieskes, Hyland & Magnusson, 2002). 5.1 Interrupted learning processes Organizations have to first unlearn before they can learn something new. People often develop firm mindset and are not willing to think beyond. Unlearning is necessary to release the previously held assumptions. Managers are reluctant to enforce learning as they risk losing power and control, apart from the fear of exposing their own mistakes (Field & Ford, 1995). The process of unlearning is a three-stage process - unfreezing, change and refreezing. The established beliefs create traps and prevent the organization from developing. 5.2 Learning and culture Feelings of people are developed through shared perceptions of daily practices. Specific work rules denote the culture of the organization. A group of engineers may have culture unique to them. Organizational innovations fail to survive and grow because of learning failures. Three different cultures – an internal operator culture and two externally based cultures – cause difficulty in learning in any organization (Gieskes, Hyland & Magnusson, 2002). Unless these cultures are aligned, there will be difficulty in learning. Again, it is only through learning that individuals learn to challenge previous assumptions. Hence, the ability of an organization to adapt to learning would depend on the cultural forces. 6. Recommendations for Eastman Sports Car Conflicts allow people to learn from different perspectives. The employees at Eastman Sports Cars have to be encouraged to learn to think differently. They have to move away from established patterns of thinking. What is learned cannot be separated from the conditions in which it is learned. At Eastman, the work environment has to become conducive because at the moment the employees find it difficult to approach their supervisor. The employees have a low morale and a pessimistic attitude and under this condition, learning would be difficult (Heifetz & Laurie, 2003). They would first have to unlearn the old habits, learn to meet challenges and then develop the capacity to explore newer fields. Eastman should focus on soft training type and double-loop learning processes. If the value of L&D is not understood, there is a tendency to escape the expenditure. The senior management at Eastman and particularly, the supervisor has to understand that in the current circumstances, L&D is even more critical to their survival (Griffin, 2009). The L&D activities of the organization should me mapped against three activities as below: Source: Griffin (2009). This analysis will help Eastman to understand what MUST be included in their L&D activities. For instance, the legal and statutory requirements, health and safety compliance fall under this category. The SHOULD and COULD categories would vary across organizations but it definitely includes support and personal development. Eastman is facing financial crunch and besides they are not too keen on expenditure on training. This requires the employees be motivated to learn from each other. The supervisor’s attitude has to change. The management too, has to realize that spending on L&D is not a waste of ‘time and energy’. The organizational culture, that has so far been one of authority and dictatorial, has to undergo change. Participation and involving the employees can bring about motivation. A change of attitude is important to encourage the employees to share a common vision and work towards the achievement of organizational goals. L&D has to be valued, understood and properly managed based on the RAM framework (Griffin): The management must analyze whether they have the right people with the right capabilities. They must recognize what is relevant for the organization to build capabilities. L&D should be aligned with the strategy and should be supported by the management at Eastman. The management should be able to measure the key performance indicators (KPI) and ensure optimum return on investment. With these strategies in place, Eastman should be able to bring about a turnaround in the company by motivating and encouraging the employees. References Anonymous, 2008, A Tested Commitment to Learning, Training & Development, vol. 62, no. 10, pp. 38-40 Belling, B James, K & Ladkin, D 2004, Back to the workplace: Howorganisations can improve their support for management learning and development, Journal of Management Development, vol. 23, no. 3, pp. 234-255 Field, L 1997, Impediments to empowerment and learning within organizations, The Learning Organization, vol. 4, no. 4, pp. 149-158 Field & Ford, 1995, Organisational learning: basic concepts Garćia-Morales, VJ Verdú-Jover, AJ & Lloréns, FJ 2009, The influence of CEO perceptions on the level of organizational learning, International Journal of Manpower, vol. 30, no. 6, pp. 567-590 Gieskes, JFB Hyland, PW & Magnusson, MG 2002, Organizational learning barriers in distributed product development: observations from a multinational corporation, Journal of Workplace Learning, vol. 14, no. 8, pp. 310-319 Griffin, E 2009, Critical challenges for L&D, Training Journal, November 2009, pp. 32-36 Heifetz, RA & Laurie, DL 2003, The leader as teacher: creating the learning orgnaization, Ivey Business Journal Online, London: Jan/Feb 2003 Orlikowaski, WJ & Hofman, JD 1997, An Improvisational Model of Change Management: The Case of Groupware Technologies, retrieved online 28 November, 2009 from http://ftp.ida.liu.se/~TDEI30/CCSWP191.html Smith, KM 2001, peter senge and the learning organization, retrieved online 28 November, 2009 from http://www.infed.org/thinkers/senge.htm Read More